BOE Spring Facilities and Boundaries Work Session #2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who were anticipating that Peter Ostrander would improve the programming logic and thinking, tune in to the portion at 1 hour and 51 minutes in to see how he impresses you.

Just listened. What is impressive? Mr. O stressed the student population projection used a simple equal-partitioning model, added 20% uncertainty. That's about it. I also heard that they will make small adjustment by placing some expected popular program in another HS if the anticipated enrollment exceeds the capacity. Anything else about curriculum, teacher recruitment and retention, and transportation? I don't hear any. Jennie just reiterated that they would use central stop model.

Karla raises this around 2 hours and 40 minutes in and Taylor and an MCPS staffer respond. Taylor thinks this will allow MCPS to improve PD by subject area in the regions and supposed there's a PD plan being developed and finalized.

Thanks for saving me a ton of time listening to BSs. Karla did ask one question I have in mind, and 2 hour 42 min in, the answer is surprising to me: they still have a design team? The original design team? I thought that they were dismissed last October-ish -- some posters on this board and other channels who were actively involved the design team were so pissed-off that they were used simply as a puppet for "mcps is collecting community inputs".

I noted the mention of the design team as well and was surprised because I thought it was dissolved like you.

The design team was reconvened about a month ago and we've met maybe twice. The meetings have been recaps of what MCOS haas done so far. We have not been given any new information, nor have we been asked for feedback on what MCPS has presented in the four months since we previously met.

MCPS is pushing ahead with info meetings to grade 3-6 families, calling them "future fairs" or something. And they are gearing up for middle school kids to apply for programs in fall 2026, with the intention of kids starting the new programs in fall 2027.

Meanwhile, the plan has not been approved. MCPS hasn't presented staffing, curriculum, transportation, or budget plans to the BoE. There is only one work session left before the March 26 vote but they haven't shared the agenda yet. It may end up being all about boundaries.

I'm concerned that Taylor and McGuire don't intend to present cost estimates until they're doing FY28 budget a year from now. By that time, students will have already applied for programs. The BoE and County Council will be stuck approving any astronomical number, because the alternative is telling thousands of 8th graders that they can't go to the programs they were promised.

It's the most manipulative process I've ever seen and it's infuriating that the BoE isn't providing responsible oversight. Everyone should contact the BoE and tell them not to approve the program plan until there's at least a budget.

Thank you for contributing your time and effort and voice to this hopeless process! Please do keep on emailing BOE members and letting them know the situation and concerns of the design team. I have completely lost hope and interests in fighting with these BS, and having still a design team and Mr. O there in CO ignite my hope again that the regional model might still has a slim chance of hope to start off from a good position... I have no hope at all though that BOE will postpone or disapprove the regional model. They have no spine nor brain nor critical thinking skills.

At the last design team meeting they asked for feedback on a PowerPoint for middle school outreach and it was amateurish and unintelligent

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who were anticipating that Peter Ostrander would improve the programming logic and thinking, tune in to the portion at 1 hour and 51 minutes in to see how he impresses you.

Just listened. What is impressive? Mr. O stressed the student population projection used a simple equal-partitioning model, added 20% uncertainty. That's about it. I also heard that they will make small adjustment by placing some expected popular program in another HS if the anticipated enrollment exceeds the capacity. Anything else about curriculum, teacher recruitment and retention, and transportation? I don't hear any. Jennie just reiterated that they would use central stop model.

Karla raises this around 2 hours and 40 minutes in and Taylor and an MCPS staffer respond. Taylor thinks this will allow MCPS to improve PD by subject area in the regions and supposed there's a PD plan being developed and finalized.

Thanks for saving me a ton of time listening to BSs. Karla did ask one question I have in mind, and 2 hour 42 min in, the answer is surprising to me: they still have a design team? The original design team? I thought that they were dismissed last October-ish -- some posters on this board and other channels who were actively involved the design team were so pissed-off that they were used simply as a puppet for "mcps is collecting community inputs".

I noted the mention of the design team as well and was surprised because I thought it was dissolved like you.

The design team was reconvened about a month ago and we've met maybe twice. The meetings have been recaps of what MCOS haas done so far. We have not been given any new information, nor have we been asked for feedback on what MCPS has presented in the four months since we previously met.

MCPS is pushing ahead with info meetings to grade 3-6 families, calling them "future fairs" or something. And they are gearing up for middle school kids to apply for programs in fall 2026, with the intention of kids starting the new programs in fall 2027.

Meanwhile, the plan has not been approved. MCPS hasn't presented staffing, curriculum, transportation, or budget plans to the BoE. There is only one work session left before the March 26 vote but they haven't shared the agenda yet. It may end up being all about boundaries.

I'm concerned that Taylor and McGuire don't intend to present cost estimates until they're doing FY28 budget a year from now. By that time, students will have already applied for programs. The BoE and County Council will be stuck approving any astronomical number, because the alternative is telling thousands of 8th graders that they can't go to the programs they were promised.

It's the most manipulative process I've ever seen and it's infuriating that the BoE isn't providing responsible oversight. Everyone should contact the BoE and tell them not to approve the program plan until there's at least a budget.

Thank you for contributing your time and effort and voice to this hopeless process! Please do keep on emailing BOE members and letting them know the situation and concerns of the design team. I have completely lost hope and interests in fighting with these BS, and having still a design team and Mr. O there in CO ignite my hope again that the regional model might still has a slim chance of hope to start off from a good position... I have no hope at all though that BOE will postpone or disapprove the regional model. They have no spine nor brain nor critical thinking skills.

At the last design team meeting they asked for feedback on a PowerPoint for middle school outreach and it was amateurish and unintelligent

Do you mean reaching out to MS students and convince them they are not used as guinea pigs? They have already started to reach out to elementary school (Gr3-5) to broadcast these name-only new programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Julie Yang has mentioned and heard the criticisms of Woodward essentially being a performing arts school. She brought it up and asked Jeannie to explain their logic.

Apparently machine learning and data sciences was added to Woodward. Is that new???

Blake and Einstein are the only schools where it’s been proven that those programs will be successful. Woodward is new and should be developed by the communities surrounding it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Julie Yang has mentioned and heard the criticisms of Woodward essentially being a performing arts school. She brought it up and asked Jeannie to explain their logic.

Apparently machine learning and data sciences was added to Woodward. Is that new???

Blake and Einstein are the only schools where it’s been proven that those programs will be successful. Woodward is new and should be developed by the communities surrounding it.

This new program is brought on the table for the first time last week, just to comfort Julie. There is no current existing ML data science program, and the regional program has zero dollar assigned for designing or purchasing curriculum.